Alexis de Tocqueville wrote Democracy in America upon returning to France from a trip to the United States in the 1830's. Tocqueville was primarily concerned with the political system of the United States and how lessons learned in America might be used to help European countries face the move towards democracy that was sweeping the continent at that time. Tocqueville wrote of America's individualistic nature and the uncommon equality between peoples in the United States. He explained that this equality made America's transformation into a democracy much smoother than economically polarized France experienced.
Tocqueville also uses America as an example to show how religious separation and its influence on government is good as long as it is agreeable by all. He argues that the United States has a kind of separation between church and state, in contrast to the close amd unhealthy relationship the Catholic church had with the government of France. At one point Tocqueville declares that "the friends of liberty attack religion" (This passage is taken out of context. He's complaining about the friends of liberty attacking religion - xmarquez Oct 29, 2006) in an effort to emphasize the role religion had played in limiting freedoms in religion.
Author's Introduction
The thing that struck Tocqueville the most about America was the, "general equality of condition among the people." In contrast, he says, Europe is not yet at this level of equality, but is rapidly approaching it. He uses France as an example here, which seven hundred years ago was, for the most part, controlled by a few powerful families. But as the church gained power, which "opened their ranks [the clergy] to all classes, to the both the poor and the rich," equality began to spread throughout government. Furthermore, as society grew in size and complexity, civil laws became more necessary, which allowed ministers of laws to rise in power. Merchants too, because of the spread of commerce, also became more equal to the old noble families and gained a great deal of political influence. The Enlightenment, which put a premium on intellect and intelligence, also became a vehicle by which the educated could gain power.
All of these factors led to a decrease in value of high birth, allowing others besides the nobility to gain power. By the 13th century, nobility could be purchased by those who amassed enough wealth to buy it. The King was also a factor, because he would confer titles of nobility on those of lower classes in order to dilute the power of the old aristocracy.
This is not just the case in France, he says, for the same processes that took place in France have been occurring throughout the Christian world. He says, "The gradual development of the principle of equality is, therefore, a providential fact. It has all the chief characteristics of such a fact: it is universal, it is lasting, it constantly eludes all human interference, and all events as well as all men contribute to its progress."
Despite seeing democracy as "advancing in the midst of the ruins it has caused", Tocqueville admits that the revolution is inevitable. To "attempt to check democracy would be in that case to resist the will of God." As a result, governments cannot try to prevent democracy, but must guide democracy into being successful. Thus far, according to Tocqueville, democracy has been "abandoned to its wild instincts," where the "revolution has taken place in the body of society without that concomitant change in laws, ideas, customs, and morals whiach was necessary to render such a revolution beneficial." Democracy, concludes Tocqueville, has been bred with nothing to fix its weakness or bring out its strengths.
He says that it is our duty to educate this democracy, "to adapt its government to time and place, and to modify it according to men and to conditions."
Where this movement is ultimately leading, he says he is not sure. However, he says that he can, "conceive of a society in which all men would feel and equal love and respect for the laws of which they consider themselves the authors," and in which "reciprocal courtesy would arise between all classes, removed alike from pride and servility." In this society, the majority of the citizens will enjoy a greater degree of prosperity.
Instead of the aristocacy and nobility controlling all the power, all the power will be held by the government. As a result, he says, "we have destroyed those individual powers which were able, single-handed, to cope with tyranny." The distance between rich and poor has been shrunken, but as they draw nearer to each other the more vehement their resistance to each other's claims of power. Tocqueville asserts, "We have, then abandoned whatever advantages of the old state things afforded, without receiving any compensation from our present condition..."
Part II Chapter 3: Liberty of the Press in the United States
In this section, Tocqueville attempts to "determine the degree of influence that the liberty of the press has exercised upon civil society in the United States." He approaches liberty of the press with great caution, perceiving more of the "the evils it prevents than of the advantages it ensures." He notes that any extreme attempt to restrict free speech for the purpose of achieving more liberty is counter-productive to its intent. Moreover, the ability of a powerful orator to excite the masses of people is dangerous (True, but I'm not sure I see a connection with the previous point - xmarquez Oct 29, 2006).
The US is a unique case in liberty of the press. Due to its evolving set of laws, criticisms are not seen as unusual. Because anyone can contribute to the wealth of public opinion, it is not centralized. Local circumstances dictate opinions and the proliferation of literature reduces the importance of individual pieces. Tocqueville views this decentralization as a loss of political power. Journalists struggle to maintain the interest of their readers, and are thus subjected to the distortion of facts to appeal to the capricious passions of the multitudes. Moreover, as he stated in Chapter 7 On The Ominpotence of the Majority, opinions that do not coincide with those of the multitude are discredited and their authors are disqualified from public respect. Therefore, many of the most capable people are afraid to exercise their right to liberty of the press.
Simultaneously, Tocqueville acknowledges that it has it benefits, namely that detects innovative ideas, forces the attention of public parties/officials, and “affords a means of intercourse between those who hear and address each other without ever coming into immediate contact.” The general principles of the US government are more stable and the chief opinions which regulate society are more durable there than in many other countries, due in large part to the inspections provided by liberty of the press.
“Strong convictions are found only at the two ends [namely, blind belief and satisfied assurance], and that doubt lies in the middle.” So long as men are somewhat firmly grounded in their beliefs and that they are educated enough to intelligently interpret new ideas and opinions, freedom of the press is advantageous. However, because this is rarely the case, this liberty presents evils to society. Tocqueville remarks, “woe to the generations which first abruptly adopt the freedom of the press.”
While Mill believes in liberty of the press in so far as it does no harm to anyone, Tocqueville assumes a more realistic position. He notes that "in order to enjoy the inestimable benefits that the liberty of the press ensures, it is necessary to submit to the inevitable evils that it creates." Both men acknowledge the strength of public opinion in influencing people's behavior, Mill views it as a positive source of moral reinforcement, while Tocqueville perceived it more as a hindrance to true expression of opinion. (could link to Mill. Interesting comparison, but I think Mill is actually closer to Tocqueville in On Representative Government - xmarquez Oct 29, 2006)
Part II Chapter 4: Political Association in the United States
In this chapter, Tocqueville looks at the freedom of association in the United States, why it is not as dangerous as it is elsewhere and why it may be viewed as a necessity in a democratic society.
Tocqueville begins by observing that the principle of association has been most widely and successfully used in America. From a young age, Americans are taught to rely upon their own exertions to resist the evils and difficulties of life. Americans will form associations to deal with many aspects of social life to make rules and punish misdemeanors through an executive power that arises within the assembly.
An Association is defined as the public assent which a number of individuals give to certain doctrines and in the endangerment (word choice? - xmarquez Oct 29, 2006) which they contract to promote in a certain manner to spread those doctrines. He distinguishes this right from the freedom of the press by the fact that these societies posses more authority than the press (why? - xmarquez Oct 29, 2006). He then distinguishes the second right of association to be the power of meeting. Finally he states that the third right of association is that the partisans of an opinion may unite in electoral bodies and choose delegates to represent them.
These associations derive from the association of the whole and the third degree of association becomes a government within a government that has the power of attacking the laws that exist and drawing up new laws that ought to be enacted. (I don't understand this poin. What is the third degree of association? - xmarquez Oct 29, 2006)
>
* Tocqueville states that under these conditions of association, he believes tension would arise as factions would claim to speak for the majority and there will come a point where a society will be compelled to act, rather than simply voice their opinions and beliefs.
He goes on to observe why free association has not been harmful in America. He states that the right of association is incorporated into the basic customs of Americans. It serves as an important safeguard against the tyranny of the majority as the minority can set up its own establishment to utilize its full will to oppose the majority. This creates a system of permanent checks on majoritarian politics by protecting the voice of the minority.
Tocqueville compares how Americans and Europeans view association. In Europe, association is synonymous to action as bodies are formed and the call to action quickly follows. They then march against the enemy which they oppose. This creates a dangerous connotation (word choice - xmarquez Oct 29, 2006). In America, the people view association as a means to show strength and challenge the majority. They believe that they can win the majority over to their side through lawful means.
This difference is attributed to the fact that there are much more extreme parties in Europe which cannot be reconciled and that America is relatively more homogeneous. In addition, the American principle of universal suffrage leaves little doubt to the authority of the majority.
(Why are associations important, in conclusion? Think of the contrast democracy/aristocracy - xmarquez Oct 29, 2006)
Part II Chapter 7: On the Omnipotence of the Majority in the United States and Its Effects
The main points of this chapter can be summarized as follows:
The hallmark of America's democratic government is the sovereignty of the majority's will. Americans directly elect legislators for short terms in office so that the people have the chance to ensure their will is being imposed. The legislature is also the most powerful branch of the government. The majority's authority is further strengthened by the idea that the will of the greater number should overrule that of the lesser number.
Tocqueville also notices a danger for democracy when the states exercising it have not had a chance to mature and become stable in their religion and morality (ex.: the south and especially the southwest). (What exactly does he mean by "maturing"? - xmarquez Oct 29, 2006) He believes that in some instances this danger can be remedied by having members of the legislative body who are not reelected on an annual basis - case in point, the members of the senate whom he finds much more able than those of the House, and thus able to check their shortcomings.
Natural problems of democracy increase with the growing power of the majority. For instance, legislative instability is common in the the United States, because legislative power is sovereign. American laws sometimes have an extremely short duration, and the execution of the laws can present problems. The public easily becomes impassioned to fight for certain causes, but can abandon those goals because of impatience.
A majority can sometimes abuse their power over the minority. The biggest problem with the democratic government of the United States is its overwhelming strength and "the shortage of guarantees against tyranny." A person who is wronged by the majority has no voice, because everything is controlled by the majority.
The majority grants the magistrates a large amount of arbitrary power because it knows that they are subject to checks and balances. Thus, everyone is able to supervise the magistrates.
Tocqueville believes public thought is controlled in America, which is a form of tyranny. He believes that no one contradicts the opinions of the majority. Free thinking, speech and discussion are extremely rare and are stifled by the government. He blames this notion for the lack of literary genius in America.
America should be more fearful of tyranny than anarchy since it is so strong. Anarchy will only come about as the product of tyranny.
Part 4, Chapters 1-8
Chapter 1
Equality breeds men’s independence and once they get a taste of this independence, men begin to dislike authority and desire political freedom. However, if the power of the nation fails, men may be led to anarchy or more often servitude (This is not clear. Explain? - xmarquez Nov 1, 2006). Even so, Tocqueville still values equality (Why? - xmarquez Nov 1, 2006).
Chapter 2
Citizens of this democratic society favor the concentration of political power. This is explained in Tocqueville’s quote, “Its favorite conception is that of a great nation composed of citizens all formed upon one pattern and all governed by a single power.” (I don't know that the quote realy explains the point that citizens in democracy favor the concentration of power - xmarquez Nov 1, 2006) The role of the individual becomes less significant than the role of the larger society. Men view each other as one in the same and feel that they deserve the same privileges and must be treated equally by the law. Since this great power of government comes from they people, they are able to justify and see no need to limit it. Everyone holds the same general political opinions and secondary, more complex opinions are suppressed or simply insignificant.
Chapter 3
Chapter III opens with Tocqueville saying that democratic nations’ “habits and sentiments predispose them to recognize [a strong central] power and to give it their support." According to Tocqueville, because citizens of democratic countries are essentially equal and need not rely on other members of society, they most often choose not to. Instead of engaging activities in regard for the community, citizens opt for the “sole visible and permanent representative of the interests of the community; that is to say, to the state.”
Tocqueville expands on this by saying that the protection of individually-owned property leads democracies towards promoting “public tranquility.” At the same time, “no man is compelled to lend his assistance to his fellow men, and none has any right to expect much support from them.” The equality of conditions acts as a disincentive to protect the rest of society. This contradiction between public safety and private protection leaves citizens willing to give some power to the state to protect them. Although Tocqueville does not deal with issues of human nature, this argument seems similar to Hobbes’ reasoning for the creation of a social contract.
Although most will agree that ceding this power “ought not [] interfere in private concerns,” according to Tocqueville, every person has a different view of how the government should protect them. As many people start pushing for their personal causes, the power of the government expands, and “a democratic government increases its power simply by the fact of its permanence.”
Chapter 4
Tocqueville claims that, despite leading to the centralization of government, they (who? - xmarquez Nov 1, 2006) end up doing so in an unequal manner depending on the circumstances from which they form.
Freedom before Equality or Vice Versa- In some cases, such as the US, citizens “have lived free long before they became equal,” as they knew of ideas such as trial by jury, freedom of speech, and other freedoms and liberties, yet were only equal once they emigrated. In this case, “private members…will never entirely forfeit their independence” as people hold individual freedom in higher regard than security through the government. Conversely, through the practice of absolute power, Europeans have learned about equality long before there were actual freedoms. In this case, “the state instantly attains the utmost limits of its strength, while private persons allow themselves to sink as suddenly to the lowest degree of weakness.”
This claim raises a number of questions. For one, can Europeans truly know what equality is if the continent is as aristocratic as Tocqueville discusses earlier? (Isn't the point that equality was created by absolute monarchies in Europe? - xmarquez Nov 1, 2006) Also, if the immigrants to the Americas were Europeans, they would seem to have had known about both equality and freedom before migrating. Finally, it seems questionable whether a person can independently know both equality and freedom, or if they go hand in hand. (Section open to comments/corrections. Please)
Method of Formation- In addition to this, Tocqueville makes a distinction between nations that are formed through violent revolution within (word choice - xmarquez Nov 1, 2006) a country’s citizens, and those that are not. In nations formed through revolution, says Tocqueville, centralization is increased “in order to centralize management of local affairs from the aristocracy,” all while the aristocracy “endeavors to make over the management of all affairs to the state.” Tocqueville predicts this will one day turn into the opposite, a prediction which seems to have come true with recent European support for devolution. Oppositely, in the US, where internal revolution did not occur, and the people “have never known the necessity of calling in the supreme power to manage their affairs.”
In Intelligence of a Society Tocqueville points out a major concern of centralization. He claims that an unintelligent population will have fewer people capable of leadership. In this case, the administrative function of the state is perpetually extended because the state alone is competent to administer the affairs of the country”
Propensity for War- Frequent wars increase centralization, as defending the nation requires a great unified strength and strategy.
Origins of the Ruler- Tocqueville says this is the “principal cause” of centralization. Whether a ruler is from an age of equality or aristocracy will determine how much they push for centralization. This gets to the heart of the matter, as central power depends on how much a society loves equality. Tocqueville sees this as a major problem, since centralization to the point of despotism can be reduced to a single principle (I'm not sure what this means - xmarquez Nov 1, 2006).
Chapter 5
All revolutions in Europe have either decreased or abolished secondary power and increased the centralization of government. The state has increased its economic power through government controlled central banks. The power of this government also greatly increases with industrialization. The central administration is becoming ever more powerful as the dynasties are steadily weaking. Religion also risks falling under this government control (Needs some explanation - xmarquez Nov 1, 2006).
Chapter 6
Democracies are in danger of a milder despotism than in times past. Equal citizens have become completely apathetic to the rest of society. Free choice becomes less and less as the people think the government's policies represent their own choices. However, this sovereignty only follows unimportant daily tasks that keep people from thinking for themselves. (Could be expanded a little. How does this fit with the argument? - xmarquez Nov 1, 2006)
Chapter 7
Tocqueville begins this chapter with the idea that times of equality are most conducive to the rise of despotism. In a democratic environment, the government is constructed out of need to be more uniform and centralized. In this environment society is much more active and the individual is subordinate. This form of government is favored over aristocracy because in aristocratic conditions, society is often sacrificed in favor of the individual. In order to create the safeguards that were present in the aristocratic system by birthright, Tocqueville suggests the entrusting of power into secondary public institutions composed of private citizens to inhibit the rise of despotism.
Tocqueville also advocates the existence of a free press. In a democratic society, man stands alone. If wronged, he may appeal to the nation. If ignored, he may appeal to mankind as a whole. A free press allows this general appeal by placing a powerful weapon to summon the aid of all his fellow citizens within man's reach.
Another power that is important in a democratic society is the judicial process. The judicial process is not to volunteer its power, but to hear every claim and administer justice fairly. Democratic peoples tend to give little importance to individual rights; it is therefore extremely important to guard against this tendency. The growth and explanation of this power is essential to complement the growth of centralized government.
Finally, Tocqueville espouses the dangers of the doctrine of judgment based on social utility. There must be certain limits placed on the actions of government and certain rights conferred to private persons in order to place more value on the cultivation of a great individual as well a great society.
Chapter 8
Conditions have never been so equal. Life in general is more comfortable than in times past. There may be fewer heroes but the growth toward greater equality seems to take its place. Man must be careful though, because he can change the course of equality for better or worse.
Study Questions
Many individuals label enlightenment thinkers antireligious, citing the skeptical and sometimes agressive view philosophers of the time had about religion. Does Tocqueville fall into the category of "antireligious"?
What does Tocqueville mean by "democracy"? What does he contrast it with?
What does Tocqueville mean by "equality of conditions"?
What kinds of effects do "equality of conditions" produce?
Tocqueville writes that "[democracy] lacks that soundness of judgment which is necessary to select men really deserving of their confidence." Does he think America can find a way to solve this fundamental problem?
What does Tocqueville think of democracy? Is it something positive, negative, or simply inevitable?
Has political leadership in the United States improved since Tocqueville's day, or do the people still elect mediocrity rather intellect?
What is the "mild despotism" that Tocqueville thinks is the biggest risk in democratic countries?
Are the "mild despotism" of the last chapters of Democracy in America and the "tyranny of the majority" mentioned earlier the same thing?
Why does democracy have a tendency toward administrative centralization?
Compare and contrast the views of Tocqueville and Mill on democracy.
Table of Contents
Democracy in America
Alexis de Tocqueville wrote Democracy in America upon returning to France from a trip to the United States in the 1830's. Tocqueville was primarily concerned with the political system of the United States and how lessons learned in America might be used to help European countries face the move towards democracy that was sweeping the continent at that time. Tocqueville wrote of America's individualistic nature and the uncommon equality between peoples in the United States. He explained that this equality made America's transformation into a democracy much smoother than economically polarized France experienced.
Tocqueville also uses America as an example to show how religious separation and its influence on government is good as long as it is agreeable by all. He argues that the United States has a kind of separation between church and state, in contrast to the close amd unhealthy relationship the Catholic church had with the government of France. At one point Tocqueville declares that "the friends of liberty attack religion" (This passage is taken out of context. He's complaining about the friends of liberty attacking religion -
Author's Introduction
The thing that struck Tocqueville the most about America was the, "general equality of condition among the people." In contrast, he says, Europe is not yet at this level of equality, but is rapidly approaching it. He uses France as an example here, which seven hundred years ago was, for the most part, controlled by a few powerful families. But as the church gained power, which "opened their ranks [the clergy] to all classes, to the both the poor and the rich," equality began to spread throughout government. Furthermore, as society grew in size and complexity, civil laws became more necessary, which allowed ministers of laws to rise in power. Merchants too, because of the spread of commerce, also became more equal to the old noble families and gained a great deal of political influence. The Enlightenment, which put a premium on intellect and intelligence, also became a vehicle by which the educated could gain power.
All of these factors led to a decrease in value of high birth, allowing others besides the nobility to gain power. By the 13th century, nobility could be purchased by those who amassed enough wealth to buy it. The King was also a factor, because he would confer titles of nobility on those of lower classes in order to dilute the power of the old aristocracy.
This is not just the case in France, he says, for the same processes that took place in France have been occurring throughout the Christian world. He says, "The gradual development of the principle of equality is, therefore, a providential fact. It has all the chief characteristics of such a fact: it is universal, it is lasting, it constantly eludes all human interference, and all events as well as all men contribute to its progress."
Despite seeing democracy as "advancing in the midst of the ruins it has caused", Tocqueville admits that the revolution is inevitable. To "attempt to check democracy would be in that case to resist the will of God." As a result, governments cannot try to prevent democracy, but must guide democracy into being successful. Thus far, according to Tocqueville, democracy has been "abandoned to its wild instincts," where the "revolution has taken place in the body of society without that concomitant change in laws, ideas, customs, and morals whiach was necessary to render such a revolution beneficial." Democracy, concludes Tocqueville, has been bred with nothing to fix its weakness or bring out its strengths.
He says that it is our duty to educate this democracy, "to adapt its government to time and place, and to modify it according to men and to conditions."
Where this movement is ultimately leading, he says he is not sure. However, he says that he can, "conceive of a society in which all men would feel and equal love and respect for the laws of which they consider themselves the authors," and in which "reciprocal courtesy would arise between all classes, removed alike from pride and servility." In this society, the majority of the citizens will enjoy a greater degree of prosperity.
Instead of the aristocacy and nobility controlling all the power, all the power will be held by the government. As a result, he says, "we have destroyed those individual powers which were able, single-handed, to cope with tyranny." The distance between rich and poor has been shrunken, but as they draw nearer to each other the more vehement their resistance to each other's claims of power. Tocqueville asserts, "We have, then abandoned whatever advantages of the old state things afforded, without receiving any compensation from our present condition..."
Part II Chapter 3: Liberty of the Press in the United States
In this section, Tocqueville attempts to "determine the degree of influence that the liberty of the press has exercised upon civil society in the United States." He approaches liberty of the press with great caution, perceiving more of the "the evils it prevents than of the advantages it ensures." He notes that any extreme attempt to restrict free speech for the purpose of achieving more liberty is counter-productive to its intent. Moreover, the ability of a powerful orator to excite the masses of people is dangerous (True, but I'm not sure I see a connection with the previous point -
The US is a unique case in liberty of the press. Due to its evolving set of laws, criticisms are not seen as unusual. Because anyone can contribute to the wealth of public opinion, it is not centralized. Local circumstances dictate opinions and the proliferation of literature reduces the importance of individual pieces. Tocqueville views this decentralization as a loss of political power. Journalists struggle to maintain the interest of their readers, and are thus subjected to the distortion of facts to appeal to the capricious passions of the multitudes. Moreover, as he stated in Chapter 7 On The Ominpotence of the Majority, opinions that do not coincide with those of the multitude are discredited and their authors are disqualified from public respect. Therefore, many of the most capable people are afraid to exercise their right to liberty of the press.
Simultaneously, Tocqueville acknowledges that it has it benefits, namely that detects innovative ideas, forces the attention of public parties/officials, and “affords a means of intercourse between those who hear and address each other without ever coming into immediate contact.” The general principles of the US government are more stable and the chief opinions which regulate society are more durable there than in many other countries, due in large part to the inspections provided by liberty of the press.
“Strong convictions are found only at the two ends [namely, blind belief and satisfied assurance], and that doubt lies in the middle.” So long as men are somewhat firmly grounded in their beliefs and that they are educated enough to intelligently interpret new ideas and opinions, freedom of the press is advantageous. However, because this is rarely the case, this liberty presents evils to society. Tocqueville remarks, “woe to the generations which first abruptly adopt the freedom of the press.”
While Mill believes in liberty of the press in so far as it does no harm to anyone, Tocqueville assumes a more realistic position. He notes that "in order to enjoy the inestimable benefits that the liberty of the press ensures, it is necessary to submit to the inevitable evils that it creates." Both men acknowledge the strength of public opinion in influencing people's behavior, Mill views it as a positive source of moral reinforcement, while Tocqueville perceived it more as a hindrance to true expression of opinion. (could link to Mill. Interesting comparison, but I think Mill is actually closer to Tocqueville in On Representative Government -
Part II Chapter 4: Political Association in the United States
In this chapter, Tocqueville looks at the freedom of association in the United States, why it is not as dangerous as it is elsewhere and why it may be viewed as a necessity in a democratic society.
- Tocqueville begins by observing that the principle of association has been most widely and successfully used in America. From a young age, Americans are taught to rely upon their own exertions to resist the evils and difficulties of life. Americans will form associations to deal with many aspects of social life to make rules and punish misdemeanors through an executive power that arises within the assembly.
- An Association is defined as the public assent which a number of individuals give to certain doctrines and in the endangerment (word choice? -
xmarquez Oct 29, 2006) which they contract to promote in a certain manner to spread those doctrines. He distinguishes this right from the freedom of the press by the fact that these societies posses more authority than the press (why? - 
xmarquez Oct 29, 2006). He then distinguishes the second right of association to be the power of meeting. Finally he states that the third right of association is that the partisans of an opinion may unite in electoral bodies and choose delegates to represent them. - These associations derive from the association of the whole and the third degree of association becomes a government within a government that has the power of attacking the laws that exist and drawing up new laws that ought to be enacted. (I don't understand this poin. What is the third degree of association? -
xmarquez Oct 29, 2006)
>* Tocqueville states that under these conditions of association, he believes tension would arise as factions would claim to speak for the majority and there will come a point where a society will be compelled to act, rather than simply voice their opinions and beliefs.
(Why are associations important, in conclusion? Think of the contrast democracy/aristocracy -
Part II Chapter 7: On the Omnipotence of the Majority in the United States and Its Effects
The main points of this chapter can be summarized as follows:
Part 4, Chapters 1-8
Chapter 1
Equality breeds men’s independence and once they get a taste of this independence, men begin to dislike authority and desire political freedom. However, if the power of the nation fails, men may be led to anarchy or more often servitude (This is not clear. Explain? -Chapter 2
Citizens of this democratic society favor the concentration of political power. This is explained in Tocqueville’s quote, “Its favorite conception is that of a great nation composed of citizens all formed upon one pattern and all governed by a single power.” (I don't know that the quote realy explains the point that citizens in democracy favor the concentration of power -Chapter 3
Chapter III opens with Tocqueville saying that democratic nations’ “habits and sentiments predispose them to recognize [a strong central] power and to give it their support." According to Tocqueville, because citizens of democratic countries are essentially equal and need not rely on other members of society, they most often choose not to. Instead of engaging activities in regard for the community, citizens opt for the “sole visible and permanent representative of the interests of the community; that is to say, to the state.”Tocqueville expands on this by saying that the protection of individually-owned property leads democracies towards promoting “public tranquility.” At the same time, “no man is compelled to lend his assistance to his fellow men, and none has any right to expect much support from them.” The equality of conditions acts as a disincentive to protect the rest of society. This contradiction between public safety and private protection leaves citizens willing to give some power to the state to protect them. Although Tocqueville does not deal with issues of human nature, this argument seems similar to Hobbes’ reasoning for the creation of a social contract.
Although most will agree that ceding this power “ought not [] interfere in private concerns,” according to Tocqueville, every person has a different view of how the government should protect them. As many people start pushing for their personal causes, the power of the government expands, and “a democratic government increases its power simply by the fact of its permanence.”
Chapter 4
Tocqueville claims that, despite leading to the centralization of government, they (who? -This claim raises a number of questions. For one, can Europeans truly know what equality is if the continent is as aristocratic as Tocqueville discusses earlier? (Isn't the point that equality was created by absolute monarchies in Europe? -
Chapter 5
All revolutions in Europe have either decreased or abolished secondary power and increased the centralization of government. The state has increased its economic power through government controlled central banks. The power of this government also greatly increases with industrialization. The central administration is becoming ever more powerful as the dynasties are steadily weaking. Religion also risks falling under this government control (Needs some explanation -Chapter 6
Democracies are in danger of a milder despotism than in times past. Equal citizens have become completely apathetic to the rest of society. Free choice becomes less and less as the people think the government's policies represent their own choices. However, this sovereignty only follows unimportant daily tasks that keep people from thinking for themselves. (Could be expanded a little. How does this fit with the argument? -Chapter 7
Tocqueville begins this chapter with the idea that times of equality are most conducive to the rise of despotism. In a democratic environment, the government is constructed out of need to be more uniform and centralized. In this environment society is much more active and the individual is subordinate. This form of government is favored over aristocracy because in aristocratic conditions, society is often sacrificed in favor of the individual. In order to create the safeguards that were present in the aristocratic system by birthright, Tocqueville suggests the entrusting of power into secondary public institutions composed of private citizens to inhibit the rise of despotism.Tocqueville also advocates the existence of a free press. In a democratic society, man stands alone. If wronged, he may appeal to the nation. If ignored, he may appeal to mankind as a whole. A free press allows this general appeal by placing a powerful weapon to summon the aid of all his fellow citizens within man's reach.
Another power that is important in a democratic society is the judicial process. The judicial process is not to volunteer its power, but to hear every claim and administer justice fairly. Democratic peoples tend to give little importance to individual rights; it is therefore extremely important to guard against this tendency. The growth and explanation of this power is essential to complement the growth of centralized government.
Finally, Tocqueville espouses the dangers of the doctrine of judgment based on social utility. There must be certain limits placed on the actions of government and certain rights conferred to private persons in order to place more value on the cultivation of a great individual as well a great society.
Chapter 8
Conditions have never been so equal. Life in general is more comfortable than in times past. There may be fewer heroes but the growth toward greater equality seems to take its place. Man must be careful though, because he can change the course of equality for better or worse.
Study Questions
- Many individuals label enlightenment thinkers antireligious, citing the skeptical and sometimes agressive view philosophers of the time had about religion. Does Tocqueville fall into the category of "antireligious"?
- What does Tocqueville mean by "democracy"? What does he contrast it with?
- What does Tocqueville mean by "equality of conditions"?
- What kinds of effects do "equality of conditions" produce?
- Tocqueville writes that "[democracy] lacks that soundness of judgment which is necessary to select men really deserving of their confidence." Does he think America can find a way to solve this fundamental problem?
- What does Tocqueville think of democracy? Is it something positive, negative, or simply inevitable?
- Has political leadership in the United States improved since Tocqueville's day, or do the people still elect mediocrity rather intellect?
- What is the "mild despotism" that Tocqueville thinks is the biggest risk in democratic countries?
- Are the "mild despotism" of the last chapters of Democracy in America and the "tyranny of the majority" mentioned earlier the same thing?
- Why does democracy have a tendency toward administrative centralization?
- Compare and contrast the views of Tocqueville and Mill on democracy.
>